Event ID: 2115733Event Started: 3/21/2013 12:45:32 PM ET
Please stand by for realtime captions. [Captioner is on music hold] [Audio Paricipant code changed to 877124, Captioner
is on music hold] [Captioner on stand-by waiting for event to begin. If there has been a change, please contact Caption
Colorado at 800-590-4197 or cc@captionedtext.com] [Captioner is on music hold, waiting for event to begin.]
You are currently on hold, we will begin shortly, please remain on the line.
[Captioner is on stand by, music hold, waiting for event to begin.]
Welcome to the transportation webinar, at this time listen only mode is on for all participants, please be aware this conference
is being recorded, if you do require technical assistance during this call please press star zero. I would like to turn
the call over to your host Mr. Jim.
Good afternoon everyone, thank you for participating in this webinar. This is on performance based planning programming.
With the Metropolitan area, and the Utah Department of transportation, they will provide information on the performance
space programming. This is open to all the external audience who is interested in the topic. Let me give you some information
on the planning, there is a winter version update in made April, please look for that. The national transit Institute are
working together to offer many course offerings. Hopefully that will be done in the next year or so. The transportation
planning this webinar is going to highlight award winners, previous award winners in 2012, that is scheduled for April 25.
From one p.m. to 3 PM Eastern standard Time. -- Stay tuned for that. In addition we would like to let you know that we completed
GIS back in the last one, and the Council made a presentation there on the ecological application, we want you to know there
is information you may be interested, -- interested in, and we will get them to you. GS exchange on April 17, it will --
April 16-17th, it participates -- participants will include Marilyn, transportation Cabinet, Transportation Authority in
California, New York State DOT, -- for peer exchange will be May 4, and May 5. It is centered around business intelligence
tools, it will consolidate multiple systems for recording analysis, participants will include representatives from Colorado
DOT, Iowa.Maryland HHA, the whole transportation department, and Utah DOT. Another one is GIS exchange will be May 9-10.
It is using cloud-based tools to support transportation agencies in the GIS effort. It is being hosted by the Transportation
Department and Boise Idaho. Members in that one will be also used -- Utah DOT, mid-Ohio, and Columbus, Ann Arbor Michigan,
if you need any other information please contact us. Phone number is 202-366-4828. Another point of information improvement
program has initiated planning analysis, the goal is to aid in selection of application tools and methods that support driven
base planning. That will be with the dialogue, feedback is planned for March is planned for March 28, which is next Friday,
the point of contact is my office there or Coke -- there as well. Issued be delivered no later than May be delivered no
later than May 13, their web-based tool with all the data to be up in June, or July. Stay tuned for that. By the way that
tool this the CPC -- CTPP, the point of contact is my office as well -- we are proceeding in putting together the role --
the planning rule, to have a schedule for that, we cannot go into detail we are in the drafting mode. Stay tune in the near
future you will see a draft rollout. I would like to turn this over to Dwayne weeks.
Good afternoon everybody. Thank you for joining us for this webinar, the Fed or -- federal transmit -- transit administration,
we wanted to solicit input on new requirement on the map 21 and how it can be met. The data transit agency should have,
what should we do about areas where we have multiple transit providers providing service, in a single transportation area.
With the larger MPL, one of the relationships out there today. How are transit operators participating in the Metropolitan
process today? We are seeking your input, from March 1 -- fourth -- to March 25. We have a circular, it is eight public
comment period you can visit that via the website, take a look at this joint development circular, and provide your comments.
We also finished the comment period for the major capital investments final rule. And the policy guidance. We will be reviewing
those comments and issued me -- issuing the final in the near future. These are picture of things the FDA has going on.
We are -- things the F TA has going on. With that I will turn it over to Ray to begin the rest of the webinar.
Good afternoon this is Ray keeper, thank you for joining us -- Ray, thank you for joining us today, we have provided a copy
of the presentation in the upload shell -- share box. We will have audio recording of the webinar as well is the transcription,
look for that in the next two weeks or so. In the meantime for those who are joining us, feel free to inns -- Interlake
question in the chat box, -- please feel free to into a question into the chat box. We will answer those questions in the
chat box. The operator online will also open the phone line, after all of the presentation have concluded. If you would
like to ask a question over -- in person, we with be happy with that as well.
Now I would like to present the speakers from the FTA. He is been working on transportation issues, he is a registered professional
engineer, his educational experience includes bachelor of science in civil will -- civil engineering, and a Masters in science
of technology management, he is currently on FHWA, he acts as they head office -- works with the head office, in planning.
Also working is Victor, he is been a community planner for six years, as a community planner, he is responsible for providing
technical assistance on the federal regulations. Governing though state wide planning process. Prior to moving to Washington
DC he was a community planner, in the region five office in Chicago. He also worked in the Illinois transportation, and
also in St. Louis Missouri. Welcome.
Good afternoon everyone, and thank you for joining us. Thank you for your patience. As we get through some of these technical
difficulties. Today you will hear about our efforts to address performance-based planning process. Along with a demonstration
about how technology can assist with data sharing. As the agenda indicates I will highlight recent activities, highlight
takeaways from the performance-based planning, in map 21, and explain process how it fits into the existing process. The
main event discussion of how practitioners have been associated performance-based plans -- to augment their planning process.
We will then end with acuity. -- And with a Q&A. Just a few key activities are listed, in peer exchanges, we will discuss
ideas and plan on how we could move forward with the planning progress, since then we have had regional workshops. They
have dulled a little -- dolt -- as they have related to the region they have gotten into a little bit more, about the states
in the transit agencies. There has been a number of significant efforts we have engaged in with the stakeholders. As well
as, this is a quick chat -- not shut -- snapshot. Map 21 addresses, all that we have learned from the exchanges over the
years by identifying performance-based planning, -- planning. These are the national goal areas mentioned in map 21. They
are also public transportation, public transportation safety goals as well. I would reference to the goals identified, it
establish measures associated with these goal areas, specifics that the goals must address. On the issue of planning, that
remains unchanged on the Metropolitan side, both Metro and state plans performance-based are to incorporate other performance-based
plans, and targets to be set. In summary as it pertains to the performance-based planning process, both the Metropolitan
and the state white transportation process are incorporate performance goals, measures and targets along with the reporting
overall effectiveness of performance-based planning. The public involvement remains a hallmark of the planning process.
The next two slides take a look at the elements of performance-based planning programming, we start with the basic strategic
drydock should -- direct should, -- strategic direct should -- direction, they capture the goals and objectives. Where appropriate
they can be set, it is important to recognize the challenge in all areas and track progress over time. Performance monitoring
is the key. They will guide investment and decisions made by the transportation agency. Making a link to decision-making,
that connection between planning and programming, requires understanding set of actions, strategies, investments that you
can use to perform him -- improve performance. Finally, successful performance-based programming, will think about not just
implementation, but also reporting and monitoring. To put what we just discussed into perspective, it is important that
the use of performance-based approach is part of, and complements the process, key elements include visions and goals, prior
ties and -- prioritize, implementation, of projects and monetary performance. -- Monitoring performance. This complements
the process in the use of supporting elements. The build on the requirement Rosses, they capture the fundamental outcomes
of the agency's goals and objectives. Our next aspirational divine -- next target, are identified in the process, as set
management plans, other voluntary planning efforts, etc. Evaluating and prioritizing packages of strategies, for analysis,
using the results to guide constraint targets. This will develop preferred program investment, as well as a long time. It
translate and overall investment plan, into a specific set of projects. Being able to conduct analysis requires tools that
may be available to some measures, but require a system of analysis and answer the question, what is the impact of said
of strategies on expected performance? -- Set of strategies. These are some other performance-based plans that are required,
that I mentioned earlier in the last slide . map 21 requires that a state must produce a risk-based as a management plan.
The plan contents are included on this slide. You can see that there is a definite type these -- definite tie between the
two. They are already in place and there is a need to promote more consistent safety measures, encourage states to promote
safety in ways that result in a consistent result to planning. Congestion management process is required in the metropolitan
areas, with the population exceeding 200,000, at CMP as it is called, is a systematic based approach that addresses state
and local needs. The CMP is intended to serve as it entered goal part, true to the funding and implementation stages. I
will hand this over to Victor content continue -- over to Victor to continue.
Thank you, and welcome everyone who is participating in this webinar. On the transit side it requires DOT to have a transit
asset management system, it will do fine a term of state of good repair, you will hear this repeated as the public transit
system also relies, on the definition of state of good repair. Or decision report yours -- tools, within one year a role
would made -- within one year a role will be issued -- rule will be issued . it requires all to have a asset management
plan to include several items, one, capital asset in the Tories, for equipment rolling stock, infrastructure, and facilities.
These are tools that are needed to assist prior ties Asian -- prioritize. And also should be under the state of good repair
program. The secretary has delegated to FTA to develop the map 21 mandated national transit safety plan, this will include
performance-based criteria, a definition of good repair, minimal safety standards, and certification training programs.
For the public transportation, and states must establish a comprehensive border safe the plan, includes a method for it
evaluating safety risks, to minimize exposure, training, the plan is required within one year after effective date of the
final rule. To carry out the safety program. I will turn it over to Ray.
Thank you I appreciate your time. Next we will talk to Tom, he is responsible for managing and arranging initiative in the
Metropolitan area, he oversees the long-range transportation, which was recently recognized as the best product desk --
best practice. In the context of regional transportation programming, Tom welcome.
Good afternoon all, I will provide a Metropolitan transportation planning perspective, and tell a little bit about the story
on how Kansas City, and our region has incorporated performance measurements. Not into -- not only into the long-range plan,
but also will focus on utilizing our longer-range. -- Long-range transportation plan. Our plan was developed over a two-year
period, it was pre-map 21, it was adopted in true -- June of 2010. One of the things unique about the planning process,
we injected a segment approval process, with our board and policy makers, to ensure each step in our process developing
in framework, and supporting financial assumptions, evaluation framework, and project in measures, that were supported.
This allowed us to move forward with confidence, that was ultimately supported. At the front end of our process where we
established a regional vision statement, and policy goals, they really reinforce the spectrum that Egan spoke to earlier,
with planning and objective formation. It was for developing and the process that we would go through for ranking and evaluating
our individual projects, for identifying performance measures, and project selection process and priorities. It was critical
for us that our policy body and board, strongly supported our policy framework, on the front and. -- end. The high-level
policy goals that came out of the framework, many of them were traditional transportation goals, that we have seen in our
plan, for many years in our past. I would make no through the process of number of new goals started to emerge, I will touch
on them briefly. Many of the measures were there like system performance, system condition, safety and security, transportation
users, accessibility, these have been embedded with our long range plans for years. We had greater emphasis on issues that
were related to economic, place making was a particular area of focus and interest, public health, we saw a much stronger
of interest in active living, and climate change and energy use. As well is restoration. These were the goals that develop
the framework for our plan, ultimately the structure by developing performance measures. We use the policy goals to develop
measures. One of the things that was helpful, going through the process was to identify specific measures. It allowed us
to detail our policy goals, and better define them. We had to use available data, and be flexible in that regard. Since
then there were more that we had to move from, we had to evolve, already asleep as time goes on. -- Evolve obviously as
time goes on. Lastly we focused on identifying our desired trends. It did not have specific targets, we had specific conversations
around map 21, moving towards targets, around the direction of the measures we wanted to move, we felt it was more important
for this update, to have come current direction, and that we were moving wholeheartedly. Specifically to this performance
measures, was a detailed report, updating annually, the second was a summary report, to primarily communicate with the public,
about the progress, or lack thereof, that we are making over time. I will not go into a whole lot of detail, these are illustrations
of some of the data that is embedded in the report. Our primary goal is specific that we are tracking, here is a picture
of performance in travel speeds, on are functional classification system, by category, here is a look at at bicycle and
pedestrian structure, this is a illustration time get to -- that will tie it to our performance program. How we are growing
as a region and developing, acknowledging the relationship that has two transportation cost and preservation, and maintenance
over time. Here is a snapshot of the public health. Where we looked at our ozone, season averages, number of violations,
and related them to specific standards, that were in place, or maybe in place in the future. Here's a recap of our 2012
progress report, we are working at our -- on our fourth one as we speak. We can take them back and remind them of our goals,
that we are working on overtime. Obviously this is new territory for us it was updated in 2010, we acknowledge we have a
lot of work to do, when there are data gaps or things interested in, when we do not have data as it stands now, we are working
on ways to fill the gaps. We are also dealing with the dynamic between regional and project specific measures, and outcomes.
It is something that is ongoing in this process. Obviously map 21 will develop -- require us to develop targets, there are
requirements mapped out in map 21. Through our update process we will be focusing on specifically. I will pass this back
to Ray.
-- Rae.
I would like to introduce Diana, she is in the Minnesota transportation, her responsibilities include development in annual
transportation report, her group also gives analysis in operations as well as maintenance, and program delivery. Thank you
for joining us Deanna.
Today I will talk about performance-based programming, I will go through our 20 year program process, to show how we are
making risk assessment. And where we are headed in the near future. The policy policy -- policy-setting we have a guiding
principles the statewide plan has key steps to make positive him packed towards the vision the 20 year plan is the next
step, it has the fifty-year vision, the supporting plans include statewide freight plan, and other modal plans -- mobile
phones. The fifty-year vision is based on understanding that transportation is a means to another end. It is necessary to
achieve a healthy environment the vision answers the question what are we trying to achieve? Not how we will do it. The
guiding principles are to serve towards a transportation system that works towards the help the people, the environment,
and the economy. This is the structure of our statewide multimodal transportation plan, it describes where we are going?
Along with the information with the existing transportation describing where we are now, initiative planning that describe
how we got here. And then finally how to connecting -- finally connecting all of the plans, and where we are now. MnDOT
is our plan it links improvement to the state highway investment plan, this illustration shows how MnDOT district -- they
are implement did through the programming schedule. -- Implemented through the programming agile -- schedule. It gives objectives
to guide investment, investment plans include highway and other modes, investment plans integrate risk assessment to establish
priorities for objected funding. These are fiscally constrained the highway investment is a mature example in the use of
performance-based allocation and the risk assessments they all follow the same basic techniques. Performance monitoring
includes a performance report and also on multi-mobile goal, -- multimodal. It will focus on each one of the process. Background
for investment plan comes from it a variety of sources, our MnDOT policy, federal and state laws, we wanted to understand
the bill and adjust where we could, and make adjustments moving forward, we project revenue and system injection -- system
condition. The disc correct -- district that was completed in 2010, since 2008 we have been engaging in risk management.
The national Highway system in Minnesota makes up most of the highways and MnDOT owns most of the highways. It is 18 billion
over the next 20 years which is 3 billion more than are previous plan. It was completed in 2009. A third from state feel
tax and a third from other sources, -- sources. Projected revenue has increased from the last plan, inflation associated
with construction related cost is on 5% annual growth, compared to the 3% averaging. In the year 2032, see the graphs at
the right, the blue represents the buying power of our expected revenue. In addition, increase system needs with the asset
management alone are expected to outpace this increased revenue amount. The second step in the -- here are the 10 investment
categories they are reflective of the policy categories in the statewide transportation program, they identify needs and
risks in these categories. Each group went through a multi step process, first each group established a workman whole --
a goal that was consistent with the statewide plan, next given and reduced amount of revenue would keep the system safe
and moving, this was known as performance level 0, then they it group identified risks associated at the performance level.
Each group established and managed the identified risk. The highest performance level meets key objectives in that category.
For each performance level the group described the amount of investment, and how it would make progress towards key objectives.
Generally investment at lower level is willingness to accept a lower risk at that category, well in a higher category gives
more risk. $30 billion is the cost associated, this is not how we would spend the 30 billion if we actually had it, investment
needed to maintain are in -- infrastructure would require all projected revenue over the 20 years -- the next 20 years.
There are also regional concerns beyond the $30 billion. Scenario a valuation, across each 10 of the investment categories,
they were used to develop building blocks in how MnDOT develops and incorporates the risk. What is a investment approach?
Different investments packaged into a three investments, starting with approach be, -- approach B, and approach see -- C.
Each approach represents on how to balance risk and look at a range, and implications of each approach. Phase -- they provide
a starting point for each discussion. It was parallel to the public sessions, date to MnDOT focused on risk and evaluation.
Setting investment priorities towards key objectives included for the first time, key cost-cutting risks, we developed capital
investment risk that spanned seven broad areas. Risk played a key role on how we managed investment decisions in this plan.
We looked for cost-cutting risks, and rolled them up for better understanding, from our own leadership and decision makers.
They are able to balance the seven risks very well. For example GASB 34 could condition our state bond rating. We are able
to sustain this for the last 10 years. -- For the next 10 years. However the next 10 years for financial stability for known
targets our highest priority. We will invest a lot of money for GASB, because conditions will decline, we will manage this.
-- [Silence] this slide details that investment programs, the work in progress, it will propose how to manage risks in the
second 10 years. It is a new way of doing business for the agency. This is what is driving our 2017 development, in the
past we have synced up the process. Typically it was not in the long-range plan, it involves both now. We show 45% revenue
that will go to the statewide performance program, associated with statewide travel, solely on the national transportation
system. Project support is about 11% depending on the program makes. -- Mix. For the statewide performance program, focused
on the NHS system, is now the functional office that is driving towards the performance outcome. It is collaboratively between
the districts, for example they will provide a list of projects that the -- that were generated. Here are the outcome investment
direction that is known or suspected for map 21. As other conditions change, these are what we known -- what are known.
District risk management program, we need to keep under the GASB threshold, there is flexibility across district, programming
is like it has been in the past,. This is how we anticipate spending the money on this program, it is still in progress.
-- Our timeline and next steps will have another round of public involvement in may and in June. Be on spring in 2013, we
will manage our risks, and continual our annual performance cycle, with investment priorities. That is what I have thank
you.
Thank you so much Deanna, I would now like to welcome Trish. Before I would introduce her I would like to pull up a poll
question. She is that the transportation authority, in this new office she has increased the use the performance to grind
-- provide action, a unified employees with agency goals. In the 10 year of 11 point In the 10 year of 11.4 billion, and
prioritize them, in the of their can recovery and investment act. As a part of the planning committee of the TRB, committee.
Welcome Trish.
What I was asked to focus on today, while learning and implementing lessons from a WM ATA performance approach. If someone
would like to advance the slide that would be great. At the end of the next 10 min. or so I would hope that each of you
would take away three things. All fine -- five components do matter, second is yes this really does work, it could drive
federal results, and finally just do it. No matter where you are today you can dive into performance-based programming.
Let's start with the five components, the goals and objectives that determine where you want to go, to make progress, allocating
resources links your actions to the old, and fifth component is the monitoring, you need to really ask yourself is this
making a difference? Are we making the progress we wanted? The same concepts here, and elements that Egan was talking about,
the lines on the figure really demonstrate that this is not a linear process. It is also a evolution, I will spend more
time talking about come moments -- components three and five. When you start down the path, you really need to start with
goals, recently they adopted new strategic format, e-mail surveys etc., it is setting the agency direction. In the four
goals that you see here. The second cup opponent, measures are really used to determine whether we are making progress toward
the goal. Listed on the slide are the time -- 10 measures, they are hounded -- howled -- they are held accountable. The
data is available, the measures are intuitive, and people can understand what they mean. Manageable number and measures
that will change over time, we could pick a measure that the improvement direction is clear, you need to know if the number
goes up or down, whether that is good? Think about all the measures out there, look to your peers to see what they are using.
On the next component, I want to spend some time here, target setting has been mentioned in the webinar, this is something
we are facing as a result of map 21, to try to share some experience, that we have had. Really want to learn that you want
to look at five things, first you need to think about who your audience is for the target, if it is an external audience,
it is important for that measure to be believable, and internal, many times they are use for motivational point of view.
Inc. about the purpose of your target, do you want to push people? Challenge folks? Help people get comfortable with performance
measures and management. Get satisfaction in knowing that they can do this. You can also have targets that are easier to
maintain, based on your audience. We are developing an actual target itself, think about data trends, actions you are planning
to take. For example in public transit, a lot of the services we provide are delivered on streets we do not own. What is
happening to those streets impact the service we can provide. Looking at the targets that they may have. What target do
you want? What I mean by that customer injury rate , do you want it to be a rejection -- reduction, or a number? Or do want
to pick a year? Let's all get back to 2010, or directional? Finally think about timeframe. A timeframe that you can have
an annual, daily, etc. target. Going back to the audience, in the reason work we have done in setting targets for the general
manager, again we had to make sure that our targets were believable. For our external targets they may have been more strict,
in turn only -- internally may have been for motivational. When talking about audience being the board and the public, it
is important -- a tool I would say in managing expectations, it provides opportunity in performance, it is impossible to
deliver on their percent on-time. Because there will be events on roads, we will have to shut them down, do alternate routes.
You have to explain why target cannot be 100%. Looking at the work we did, target performance, thinking about actions, are
very critical. One of the numbers are easier types of targets to resume, that is why they are selected most of the time,
they were tracked on a monthly basis, that is why this is circled here. We do have annual targets. I think one reason why
going through these steps, is successful here, we spent the time to collect the data for that kind of input area, we looked
at the actions, the constraint -- constraints, we had a facilitated stretched -- session, to look at these. This were --
these were the keys to success. Our favorites on the area performance, I say favorite, because people mostly talk to us
about. Escalators that are hopefully working, but they talk about ones that are down. The reason why bring this slide again,
the audience in this case, the board and the public, we need to think about managing expectations. Those expectations are
that we will have escalators available 100%. If you look at this data in the calendar date, it is them parsable -- impossible
to have them all of the time, we will have to rehabilitate some of our facilities. This just shows you that even if we were
perfect, we would not be able to reach 100%. Again what we found in looking at the data, and looking at the work we were
doing, we wanted to focus on how we could reduce this area. In 2013, were increasing the amount of schedules, we were replacing
things. It directs us to the unscheduled maintenance, for opportunity to drive performance improvement. I will speed things
up. The fourth. Component -- is how we are linking actions to performance and goals, through business plans, in how goals
are met, and also the resource and targets. I will put this slide up for a second, it shows that our business lines are
straightforward. The most important thing is the call him action owner, listing a name is very important. Moving on to the
fifth component, as your monitoring evaluation. -- Is your monitoring a valuation. If you look at these pictures here with
the squiggly lines, that is training by train, second by second, and how close we are incoming to our expected delivery.
It is a monthly look back as to why we have the results we did. We also have an annual look back, a dashboard or a scorecard,
it looks at the general managers 12 goals he has. I bring this up you will have this based on your audience and the monitoring
effort. Shifting gills to the second main take away, performance-based programming works. The first example being frail
on-time performance -- rail on-time performance. One of our goals is to deliver quality service, on-time service, and also
to invest our assets. The November box here is highlighted, because there is a significant distance -- difference. That
difference was in 2011 we had track work. That was implementing on performance, you could see the impact of that decision
a year later. This diagram shows the change I'm talking about, we are still doing quite a lot of track work, we are currently
doing it many hours of day, not midday. The second example is how it really does work, it will show you where you will need
to get detailed information to answer the question, why performance is changing? We really want to perform well in escalator
availability. Here you see quite a difference, that Makes you wonder why the performance was as low as it was in 2011? That
drove us to look in the mid-time to repair. Maintenance compliance, what we discovered, if you look at our preventative
maintenance in 2011, we were at 44%, if you're not doing it to a higher level, you will have trouble. We were definitely
seeing that. The best news is that in increased up to 64%. Another example in performance-based programming really impacts
results is, it enables you to identify actions individuals can take. What I mean by that is customer injury rate, on number
two -- our number two causes are collisions. Where they happening? And why? What this will do is to force you to answer
those questions. We were starting to look at exactly where they were happening? And we were labeling on the graph though
red marks. We entered hotspots, where two or more were occurring within the station. Where they were identified, it allowed
us to take specific actions to allow approved meds. This really helps -- actions to allow improvements. This really helps
to improve the safety of our service. Again to review on the three main takeaways, first that the five performance components
matter, I give kudos to FHWA and other exchanges in providing guidance for industry. You can also see that the Astrid in
leadership -- the little asterisk, the leadership support is key to success. The second take away is that it works, provided
those three examples. There are many more, I can share them with you. Just let me know. Then finally, just do it, when you
start using data it will get better. You do not have to be large to start implementing performance-based programming, pink
about it in your own life, what is your goal? Etc. Finally map 21, as you know, it will force us down this path, it is an
opportunity for us to embrace concepts here, to see how it can improve performance. With that I would like to pass it back
to Rae.
Thank you Trish. One of the sections we started a little late, we will be going over our time, if you have not catch to
at the beginning, we will be making the presentation and audio available at the art -- transportation building website,
it is available in the chat box. If you are online feel free to download the PowerPoint. John Thomas will be bringing up
they PowerPoint. He is the budget manager for you plan, that he has initiated or five years ago, he is led to you plan at
effort -- he has led the you plan with the evolving tech knowledge he -- technology. It is also spread to more than a dozen
states. Additionally FHWA every day counts, program recognizes you plan, technology that can assist with project delivery.
Welcome John.
Thank you. Our previous presenters had really good information, through different approaches and policy issues, how to address
goals and targets, what I would like to do is spend a few minutes showing how we can communicate that. In a couple of different
ways. We have a lot of information, it comes out of our efforts. Some of the newer technologies available make it look a
bit easier, in sharing it within our organization and other organizations. What I'm showing you here is a commercial off-the-shelf
product. It is available through this web address, what is done for our agency is getting our information organize, out
of the different silos, within the different divisions and groups, making get more relevant to decision-making. To that
specific division, or decision-makers looking at the broader concept of information. Trying to make decisions on how to
more efficiently spend dollars. What I would like to show you is some of the maps, we have configured this software as a
service, we pay little money to get this product, it will save us time in getting this information into different maps.
I clicked on our map, that is a custom application to our safety group, that they wanted to display information, you could
see they created different indexes associated. There sharing information and other measures, in a very simple -- I would
say simpler method that we used to have, we can have it available to us. Information can be stored in the pop-ups, however
you would like it. You can link it to different websites. It will allow you to extend information, that you are trying to
share. It will provide opportunity to get a little more focused on managing information, or better decision-making. In this
programming conceptually the interesting thing is that we are starting to be able to see how our system and our information
can come together, in the technology that does not burden us. With just managing the system. Let's go to this information
now developed and presented in different ways, or display, a payment and analysis, the data that reports all kinds of different
conditions. Typically this information as an example, this fits in to one of our third party vendor proprietary software,
it was a little bit difficult to access and use, for instance what if you wanted to compare safety? In those third-party
systems it was hard to combine the two, now we can do it very quickly to help identify the issues they want to address.
This is been a role change in how we view this information. It is helped us be more efficient. We have orange book, these
are just preservation type projects. For the first time we are using other legacy systems, and we are able to put them,
and see a map that is hard to get access to, we click on it, get the information that is available to the department, and
spent time management -- managing the system. As the other presenters demonstrated, there are ways to approach performance-based
programming. These tools might help us better understand, how to deploy that, those goals and initiatives in a way that
helps us to be more direct. With that, one of the things that has been coming up quite a bit, is map 21. We wanted to try
to understand how to organize our thoughts, around map 21, how can we start organizing this information? So we went through,
and try to understand the different sections, I am just rolling down to give you a sense of how many things we were looking
at. And then as we come back in the next set -- step, as you saw earlier I opened up the purple book project, using that
become available, we are able to demonstrate this information in different formats, and maps, once we have it organized.
What we are finding here, there are other things that we have information on, classifications that are already organized,
we could display that, very quickly. We can go to a general concept on what this might look like. Maybe we worked with federal
highways, and other groups, and a way to organize where each state can have a common format, and adjoining states can chart
-- start to share that. That is a technology that we are starting to say make sense -- see makes sense. Once you do that,
it gets pretty easy to say, can you do other technologies? We can easily take data and put them in different types of files.
Here we are in Salt Lake City. I will scroll down and see a longer range view of a plan, this is what we have done to try
to understand -- this is in Google Earth, you could take that data because it is organized, and see how the level performance
occurs over time. You could start to get a perspective of what is working, bicolor, -- by the color, you could describe
it anyway you like. By height, you can start to organize the information and use it in different ways. You can start to
look at how the land-use is forming words this is -- is forming. This is how we can get a sense of if we are accurate, or
need to work on things. These tools will help us to understand to start to organize information and use it, it creates partnerships.
Here we have our transit agency, we were able to work with them, get their numbers in here, and get a sense of what they're
different light rail lines, and bus lines are doing. We can be more collaborative in the way we share information. Other
performance placed programming, this may assist as we develop the program. I would like to share little bit here, there's
been the recognition in the federal highways, trying to build our relationships with them, and try to understand the technologies
and what they mean, they talk about view plan, and other tools and techniques. What we're trying to understand, what are
the appropriate tools? Went to use the appropriate tool for the right decision? Federal Highway is helping us with that
effort. We have recently created a technology implementation group, X assessment plan -- assessment land -- plan. What is
been interesting about that is every state has a different take on how they want to organize their permission. We are learning
their techniques. We gained our build of knowledge, to continue to gain understanding of this. There are three states out
here Minnesota, Pennsylvania, California, that could potentially take on part two, and participate with states around them,
in developing their own plan. With support. Try to in valuate organization, and understand how this technology can improve
our system, for performance-based programming. We will know whether or not these states are awarded the grant, to conduct
this work. The states you could tell our no-cost, they have free license for a year. Technical support. A lot of activity
has occurred here. If any states are interested in participating, look at this map, and contact your nearest neighbor. Get
the dialogue going. I just wanted to share a couple approaches how we can use technology to share the results, of our work
around performance-based planning. Thank you.
Thank you so much John. Would like to open up the phone lines to answer any light questions.
Thank you if you would like to answer a question press star one, on your touchtone, you will hear a tone indicating you
are on the line, you may remove yourself from the queue at any time following -- by pressing start to. -- 2. That is star
one if you have a question. There are no questions in the queue at this time.
Thank you operator. We do have one more poll question, if you have any other questions feel free to post them in the chat
box. Going once. Going twice. Okay, hopefully that is a good sign, we have dazzled you with our presentation. I want to
take a moment to thank our presentations, -- presenters, thank you for your time.
Pardon the interruption, I do have one more question.
Hi I am calling from Washington state environment where, we have noticed that our neighboring partners, Amtrak or Greyhound
may change their service, they are not contacting us at the local level, to let us know the service schedule changes have
been made. How can we address the it external forces who do not allow us to do the best to our customers? Has that been
addressed by anyone else? Who is hit the same wall? Thank you.
We are deciding who will answer first.
This is Victor. I would just say to continue to try to maintain open communications to the extent you can. To promote discussions.
And just communicate to pull the entities together that you need to, in putting together your plans. And in different situations,
some entities are more cooperative than others, at this time I will keep saying try -- just keep trying.
As information will start to be share -- shared out there, the then folks will start working together. -- Then the folks
will start working together. They will see the benefit in coming up with solutions for the transit agency, and the regular
planning agency can't get benefit out of. We hope as we start to put information out there, as it becomes more public ,
then folks will be more willing to get on board.
Thank you.
We have one question in the chat box.
Have you seen any models based on characteristics that we can do for a 20 year long range transportation plan?
This is Tom, with Mark, I will attempt to respond to that. We are not currently, at least in our region, I am not aware
of any, commonly known tools for forecasting crash frequency. We have other measures that correlate often times that delay
other related measures that are more for castable with her traditional models, we have existing data on safety, we have
not attempted to forecast crashes out in the future.
This is Egan, federal Highway has been doing some searching on predicted models, feel free to shoot is in the mail, so we
can see if we can get you information on where they are with that process.
There are no further questions at the queue -- further questions in the queue at this time.
On the chat there is a couple of questions. That may be helpful.
John can you respond? How many people to maintain.
In Utah previously, five years ago we were comfortable with data, putting information on the map was a secondary thing we
did not have any GIS staff, we used a little Photoshop, it is very different. I am trying to frame the cost and effort,
we have had to go to limited exposure, to where we are today. It took quite a bit of effort, it wasn't about -- till about
two years ago, that change the flavor on this. This commercial software that is off-the-shelf, it is not custom. We paid
$17,000 and we cannot even use all the credits we have with it, that is not the sole cost, we have five people doing this
work, our groups and divisions are prioritizing to make their efforts -- information available. When we did this we visited
each 12 of the states, it is remarkable on how far they are, in terms of the GIS understanding. With the relationships and
data owners, it is remarkable. Washington state I would say the net -- the same thing. Great opportunities to easily taking
that experience with GIS, and moving them to different platforms very quickly. Actually that map of the US, you can click
on the state and see their own site up and running. Most of them are running externally right now, with external focus.
The answer it depends, it is not like anything where we were five years ago, while we started. It was not very satisfying,
it was a lot of risk am -- and it was a lot of money. We started to figure out what data we needed and how to organize it.
Thank you.
There is a question in the chat.
Were there any elected officials on the executive board that worked on setting performance targets?
When we were setting targets, the work was facilitated work section with our executive -- executives, when we are looking
at the data trends, talking about actions that were taken, that would impact the performance results, there were not active
participants in that workstation -- work session. There were dialogue between the general manager and the board, before
targets were set. That is a yes or no answer, the board was definitely involved in the final targets that were set.
Thank you Patricia.
We will see if we have any other questions. In the meantime can the operator open the phone lines.
Once again in this star one if you have a question today.
There is a question about how many staff in Utah have access to a RC GIS -- a RC GIS online?
What the seats do is provide use for people who want to make maps, store them, and BNA GIS analyst position, we have not
built those seats -- and to have a GIS analyst position, we have not set -- field -- we have not filled those seats yet.
They are not limited -- unlimited users, and type of calls.
What is the name of the op -- off-the-shelf product.
It is called arc GIS online -- it is a delivery of mechanism of information that has functionalities and things, once you
get into it it does quite a bit. They do updates. We seen an update this morning now you can do map quest type browsing.
I do not have to worry about that stuff anymore, I only worry on how we use this information on decision-making.
Thank you John.
Any other questions?
A follow-up question for John. How do you compare the use of a RC GIS online with Google Earth system?
They are very different, they serve different needs, in Google Earth 3-D, it is lightweight and does not require work, it
is limited. Were GIS, systems provide a robust Interpress -- enterprize level of scalability we have found we need. There
are other tools out there, there are other things that will be coming available. Our risk because we are not in a custom
application now, we are in the open environment, it has had an effect on our agency, where we have focused on getting existing
information organized. It is not replacing any legacy systems or anything like that. Now we are focusing on how to analyze
the data, so we can put into the map, we can build into videos, once we get it organized we can do all kinds of things.
That has been the real benefit to the department. We are not tied to a technology, now we are focused on how to manage the
information better.
Thank you John.
I see been indicated that this discussion will be provided in April every day counts summits. Can you provide information
in the chat thank you -- chat, thank you.
Have you purchased any copies of Google Earth?
The department has copies of that, and other products, we are not vendor specific, we use them where we feel each one has
their own strength, and we use it to their best advantage. -- To our best advantage.
Thank you very much, again if we do not have any questions, we will wrap it up, thank you to all of our presenters. As well
is the folks who helped coordinate this system -- this conference. Along with faith all -- Faith Hall. we will also have
information on FHWA transportation building website. If you do have suggestions for future webinars, please go ahead and
let us know on the website, of course you can contact anyone from your FHWA division, or you FTA. Hope you have enjoyed
our presentation, hopefully we will see you April 25. Thank you everyone.
That concludes our conference for Tuesday, thank you for your participation in using AT&T teleconference, you may disconnect
at this time.
-- That concludes our conference for today, thank you for participating in using AT&T teleconference, you may disconnect
at this time.
[Event concluded]